Validity of Data Collected from Randomized Behavioral Clinical Trials During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Decoding Immuno-Competence: A Novel Analysis of Complete Blood Cell Count Data in COVID-19 Outcomes

BACKGROUND

While 'immuno-competence' is a well-known term, it lacks an operational definition. To address this omission, this study explored whether the temporal and structured data of the complete blood cell count (CBC) can rapidly estimate immuno-competence. To this end, one or more ratios that included data on all monocytes, lymphocytes and neutrophils were investigated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Longitudinal CBC data collected from 101 COVID-19 patients (291 observations) were analyzed. Dynamics were estimated with several approaches, which included non-structured (the classic CBC format) and structured data. Structured data were assessed as complex ratios that capture multicellular interactions among leukocytes. In comparing survivors with non-survivors, the hypothesis that immuno-competence may exhibit feedback-like (oscillatory or cyclic) responses was tested.

RESULTS

While non-structured data did not distinguish survivors from non-survivors, structured data revealed immunological and statistical differences between outcomes: while survivors exhibited oscillatory data patterns, non-survivors did not. In survivors, many variables (including IL-6, hemoglobin and several complex indicators) showed values above or below the levels observed on day 1 of the hospitalization period, displaying L-shaped data distributions (positive kurtosis). In contrast, non-survivors did not exhibit kurtosis. Three immunologically defined data subsets included only survivors. Because information was based on visual patterns generated in real time, this method can, potentially, provide information rapidly.

DISCUSSION

The hypothesis that immuno-competence expresses feedback-like loops when immunological data are structured was not rejected. This function seemed to be impaired in immuno-suppressed individuals. While this method rapidly informs, it is only a guide that, to be confirmed, requires additional tests. Despite this limitation, the fact that three protective (survival-associated) immunological data subsets were observed since day 1 supports many clinical decisions, including the early and personalized prognosis and identification of targets that immunomodulatory therapies could pursue. Because it extracts more information from the same data, structured data may replace the century-old format of the CBC.

Virtual delivery of improvisational movement and social engagement interventions in the IMOVE trial during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

IMOVE evaluated the contributions of movement and social engagement to quality of life, brain network connectivity, and motor and social-emotional functioning in people with early-stage Alzheimer's disease participating with a caregiver. In response to COVID-19 restrictions, a pilot study was conducted to assess integrity of key elements of the intervention and feasibility of virtual intervention delivery.

Methods

Participants in the parent study were randomized to one of 4 study conditions (Movement Group [MG], Movement Alone [MA], Social Group [SG], or Usual Care [UC; control]). To test virtual adaptations of each condition, groups of three participant-caregiver dyads (6 individuals) who had completed the parent trial participated in virtual adaptation classes. We adopted an engineering-inspired, rapid refinement model to optimize virtual interventions on the dimensions of social connectedness, fun, and physical exertion. After completing one iteration, participants gave feedback and adjustments were made to the intervention. This process was repeated until no further adjustments were needed.

Results

The MA arm easily transitioned to virtual format. The virtual MG intervention required the most iterations, with participants reporting needs for additional technology support, higher level of physical exertion, and stronger social connection. The virtual SG intervention reported good social connection, but needed additional technology instruction and measures to promote equal participation.

Conclusions

Our pilot study results underscore the feasibility of delivering remote social and/or dance interventions for older adults and provide a useful road map for other research teams interested in increasing their reach by adapting in-person group behavioral interventions for remote delivery.

Navigating COVID-19 and related challenges to completing clinical trials: Lessons from the PATRIOT and STEP-UP randomized prevention trials

BACKGROUND/AIMS

High follow-up is critical in randomized clinical trials. We developed novel approaches to modify in-person visits and complete follow-up during COVID-19. Since these strategies are broadly applicable to circumstances wherein follow-up is difficult, they may help in contingency planning. The objective of this article is to develop and evaluate new approaches to replace detailed, in-person study visits for two trials focused on preventing diabetic foot complications.

METHODS

A quasi-experimental pre-post design compared approaches for follow-up during COVID-19 to approaches pre-COVID-19. Study subjects were outpatients at two Veterans Affairs Medical Centers. Following a research "hold," research resumed in February 2021 for Self-monitoring, Thermometry and Educating Patients for Ulcer Prevention (STEP UP) (n = 241), which focused on preventing recurrent foot ulcers, and in April 2021 for Preventing Amputation by Tailored Risk-based Intervention to Optimize Therapy (PATRIOT) (n = 406), which focused on preventing pre-ulcerative and ulcerative lesions. To complete data collection, we shortened visits, focused on primary and secondary outcomes, and conducted virtual visits when appropriate. For STEP UP, we created a 20-min assessment process that could be administered by phone. Since PATRIOT required plantar photographs to assess foot lesions, we conducted short face-to-face visits. We explored differences and assessed proportion completing visit, visit completion/100 person-months and compared COVID-19 to pre- COVID-19 using unadjusted risk ratios, incidence rate ratios, all with associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Finally, we report time-to-visit curves.

RESULTS

In both studies, participants whose follow-up concluded pre- COVID-19 seemed older than those whose follow-up concluded during COVID-19 (PATRIOT: 68.0 (67.2, 68.9) versus 65.2 years (61.9, 68.5); STEP UP: 67.5 (66.2, 68.9) versus 65.3 (63.3, 67.3)). For STEP UP, we completed 91 visits pre- COVID-19 (37.8% (31.6%, 44.2%)) and 63 visits during COVID-19 (78.8% (68.2%, 87.1%)). This was over 1309 person-months pre-COVID-19, and over 208.8 person-months during COVID-19; the visit completion rate/100 person-months were: pre-COVID-19 7.0 (5.6, 8.5), COVID-19 30.2 (23.2, 38.6); risk ratio: 2.1 (1.7, 2.5); and incidence rate ratio 4.3 (3.1, 5.9). Similarly, for PATRIOT, we completed 316 visits pre-COVID-19 (77.8% (73.5%, 81.8%)) and 27 assessments during COVID-19 (84.4% (67.2%, 94.7%)). This was over 1192.7 person-months pre-COVID-19 and 39.3 person-months during COVID-19. The visit completion rate/100 person-months in PATRIOT were: pre-COVID-19 2.7 (2.4, 3.0), COVID-19 6.9 (4.5, 10); risk ratio 1.1 (0.9, 1.3); incidence rate ratio 2.6 (1.8, 3.8). For both studies, the follow-up curves began separating at < 2 months.

CONCLUSIONS

We achieved higher completion rates during COVID-19 compared to pre-COVID-19 by modifying visits and focusing on primary and secondary outcomes. These strategies prevent excessive missing data, support more valid conclusions, and improve efficiency. They may provide important alternative strategies to achieving higher follow-up in randomized clinical trials.

Augmenting family based treatment with emotion coaching for adolescents with anorexia nervosa and atypical anorexia nervosa: Trial design and methodological report

This article characterizes the design, recruitment, methodology, participant characteristics, and preliminary feasibility and acceptability of the Families Ending Eating Disorders (FEED) open pilot study. FEED augments family-based treatment (FBT) for adolescents with anorexia nervosa (AN) and atypical anorexia nervosa (AAN) with an emotion coaching (EC) group for parents (i.e., FBT + EC). We targeted families high in critical comments and low warmth (assessed by the Five-Minute Speech Sample), known predictors of poor response in FBT. Eligible participants included adolescents initiating outpatient FBT, diagnosed with AN/AAN, ages 12-17, with a parent high in critical comments/low in warmth. The first phase of the study was an open pilot which demonstrated feasibility and acceptability of FBT + EC. Thus, we proceeded with the small randomized controlled trial (RCT). Eligible families were randomized to either 10 weeks of FBT + EC parent group treatment or the 10- week parent support group (control condition). The primary outcomes were parent critical comments and parental warmth, while our exploratory outcome was adolescent weight restoration. Novel aspects of the trial design (e.g., specifically targeting typical treatment non-responders), as well as recruitment and retention challenges in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic are discussed.

COVID-19 Exposure and Family Impact Scales for Adolescents and Young Adults

OBJECTIVE

To understand the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on adolescents and young adults (AYAs), we adapted the COVID-19 Exposure and Family Impact Scales (CEFIS; Kazak et al., 2021) for AYAs. Here, we report on the development, structure, and psychometric properties of the CEFIS-AYA.

METHODS

The CEFIS-AYA was developed by a multidisciplinary, multi-institutional team using a rapid iterative process. Data from 3,912 AYAs from 21 programs at 16 institutions across the United States were collected from May 2020 to April 2021. We examined the underlying structure of the CEFIS-AYA using principal component analysis (PCA), calculated internal consistencies, and explored differences in scores by gender and age.

RESULTS

Participants reported exposure to a range of COVID-19-related events (M = 9.08 events, of 28). On the bidirectional 4-point Impact scale, mean item scores were mostly above the midpoint, indicating a slightly negative impact. Kuder-Richardson 20/Cronbach's Alpha was good for Exposure (α = .76) and excellent for Impact (α = .93). PCA identified seven factors for Exposure (Severe COVID-19, Loss of Income, Limited Access to Essentials, COVID-19 Exposure, Disruptions to Activities, Disruptions to Living Conditions, and Designation as an Essential Worker) and five for Impact (Self and Family Relationships, Physical Well-Being, Emotional Well-Being, Social Well-Being, and Distress). Gender and age differences in CEFIS-AYA scores were identified.

DISCUSSION

Initial reliability data are strong and support use of the CEFIS-AYA for measuring the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on AYAs in research and clinical care.

Randomized Controlled Trial of a Remote Coaching mHealth Adherence Intervention in Youth Living with HIV

Youth living with HIV (YLWH) in the US have low rates of viral suppression (VS). In a prospective randomized clinical trial (ATN152) that enrolled 89 YLWH on antiretroviral therapy (ART) with detectable viral load, we evaluated a 12 week triggered escalating real-time adherence (TERA) intervention with remote coaching, electronic dose monitoring (EDM), and outreach for missed/delayed doses compared to standard of care (SOC). Median [Q1, Q3] percent days with EDM opening was higher in TERA (72% (47%, 89%)) versus SOC (41% (21%, 59%); p < 0.001) and incidence of numbers of 7 day gaps between openings were lower (TERA to SOC ratio: 0.40; 95% CI 0.30, 0.53; p < 0.001). There were no differences in VS at week 12 (TERA 35%; 95% CI 21%, 51% versus SOC 36%; 95% CI 22%, 51%; p > 0.99) or later time-points. The intervention improved adherence but not VS in heavily ART-experienced YLWH. Remote coaching more closely tailored to the unique dosing patterns and duration of need for youth struggling to reach VS warrants further investigation.

Effectiveness of a web-based behavioural activation intervention for individuals with depression based on the Health Action Process Approach: protocol for a randomised controlled trial with a 6-month follow-up

INTRODUCTION

Behavioural activation is a highly effective treatment for depression. However, there is considerable heterogeneity of interventions grouped under the term 'behavioural activation'. A main reason for the heterogeneity is the lack of a unified theory in the intervention development: few of the established intervention manuals give a theoretical rationale for their intervention techniques. For the first time, this study will examine the effectiveness of a theory-based behavioural activation intervention (InterAKTIV) based on the Health Action Process Approach. The intervention is implemented online to ensure broad dissemination and standardisation.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In a two-arm randomised controlled trial, the effectiveness of a guided web-based behavioural activation intervention for people with depression will be evaluated. Participants are recruited via the print and online media of a large German healthcare insurance company. Individuals (age 18-65), who meet criteria for major depressive episode in a clinical interview and no exclusion criteria are eligible for inclusion. A target sample of 128 participants is randomly allocated to either the intervention group (immediate access to InterAKTIV) or treatment as usual (access after follow-up assessment). The primary outcome of depressive symptom severity (Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Clinician Rating) and secondary outcomes, including behavioural activation, physical activity and motivational and volitional outcomes are assessed at baseline, post treatment and 6-month follow-up. Data will be analysed on an intention-to-treat basis with additional per-protocol analyses.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This trial is approved by the ethics committee of the Albert-Ludwigs-University of Freiburg (no.: 20-1045). All participants are required to submit their informed consent online before study inclusion. The results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

This trial was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS): DRKS00024349 (date of registration: 29 January 2021).

Lessons on Resilient Research: Adapting the Tribal Turning Point Study to COVID-19

Tribal Turning Point (TTP) is a community-based randomized controlled trial of a lifestyle intervention to reduce risk factors for type 2 diabetes in Native youth. TTP began in 2018 and was interrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. In this paper we aimed to understand 1) how the pandemic impacted TTP's operations, and how the TTP team successfully adapted to these impacts; 2) how the effects of COVID-19 and our adaptations to them were similar or different across TTP's research sites; and 3) lessons learned from this experience that may help other Native health research teams be resilient in this and future crises. Using a collaborative mixed methods approach, this report explored five a priori domains of adaptation: intervention delivery, participant engagement, data collection, analytic strategies, and team operations. We derived three lessons learned: 1) ensure that support offered is flexible to differing needs and responsive to changes over time; 2) adapt collaboratively and iteratively while remaining rooted in community; and 3) recognize that relationships are the foundation of successful research.

COVID-19 Exposure and Family Impact Scales: Factor Structure and Initial Psychometrics

Objective

In response to the rapidly unfolding coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in spring 2020, we developed a caregiver-report measure to understand the extent to which children and families were exposed to events related to COVID-19 and their perceptions of its impact. This article reports on the factor structure and psychometric properties of this measure.

Methods

The COVID-19 Exposure and Family Impact Scales (CEFIS) were developed by a multidisciplinary, multi-institutional team using a rapid iterative process. Data from 1805 caregivers recruited from 28 programs at 15 institutions across the United States were collected from May—September 2020. We examined the underlying structure of the CEFIS using exploratory factor analyses and its internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha).

Results

Participants reported a range of COVID-19-related events (M = 8.71 events of 25). On the bidirectional 4-point impact scale, mean scores were mostly above the midpoint, indicating a slightly negative impact. Cronbach’s alpha was excellent for Exposure (α = .80) and Impact (α = .92). Factor analysis identified six factors for Exposure (COVID-19 experiences, Access to essentials, Disruptions to living conditions, Loss of income, Family caregiving and activities, and Designation as an essential worker). There were three factors for Impact (Personal well-being, Family interactions, and Distress).

Discussion

The CEFIS has strong factors assessing Exposure to events related to COVID-19, and the Impact of these events on families of children in pediatric healthcare. These initial validation data support use of the CEFIS for measuring the effect of the pandemic.